Thomas v. Morris’s Empirical Analysis
844 F.2d 1337 · 1988
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2014
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 5861 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on North Carolina v. Pearce · Missouri v. Hunter · Whalen v. United States · Ex parte Lange · Green v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Given that, in its application to the case before us, “the Double Jeopardy Clause does no more than prevent the sentencing court from prescribing greater punishment than the legislature intended,” the state-court remedy fully vindicated respondent’s double jeopardy rights. The Missouri court vacated the attempted robbery conviction and sentence and credited the time that respondent had served under that conviction against the remaining sentence for felony murder. This remedy of crediting time already served against the sentence that re mained in place is consistent with our approach to multiple punishments problems in other contexts. Respondent now stands convicted of felony murder alone, and his continued confinement under the single sentence imposed for that crime is not double jeopardy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“This Court has rejected the ‘doctrine that a prisoner, whose guilt is established by a regular verdict, is to escape punishment altogether because the court committed an error in passing the sentence.’ The Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner. In this case the court ‘only set aside what it had no authority to do, and substitute(d) directions required by the law to • be done upon the conviction of the offender.’ It did not twice put petitioner in jeopardy for the same offense. The sentence, as corrected, imposes a valid punishment for an offense instead of an invalid punishment for that offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“had fully suffered one of the alternative punishments to which alone the law subjected him, the power of the court to punish further was gone.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Jones v. Thomas
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.